Ever notice how [some] liberals talk tough and pretend to be looking for a fight, then turn into whiny little biatches the minute you hit back?Yes, I have and it doesn't matter what the topic is.
However, in this case the liberal in question is Joe Klein and the topic is John McCain. Specifically, Klein refers to McCain's words today regarding Barack Obama's...nuanced...approach to determining whether the Surge tactic has served its purpose or not as a 'meltdown.' Really? To me, 'meltdown' equals crazy and/or mind-bogglingly illogical. Were McCain's words either of those? Let's see if this is so.
In response to Obama's admission that, knowing what he knows now, he would have still been against the Surge prior to its onset, McCain comes to a conclusion about his opponent:
This is a clear choice that the American people have. I had the courage and the judgment to say I would rather lose a political campaign than lose a war. It seems to me that Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign.Is this reasonable? Or is it "scurrillous?"
Obama's advisers have surmised that if their candidate admits error about his judgment in the matter, his base--the anti-warriors of the hard Left--will turn against him. In addition, the advisers are worried about those delegates to the Democrat National Convention--Hillary Clinton hasn't released hers yet. Who knows what would happen to them were Obama to repudiate his previous position regarding Iraq? (Notice I said that these are the advisers' concerns. The candidate himself isn't sweating this stuff.)
And then there's the fact that, in 2005, Obama was against withdrawing troops from Iraq.
Interviewer: But you said that troops should be withdrawn.(Emphasis mine.)
Obama: No, no. I’ve never said that troops should be withdrawn. What I’ve said is that we’ve got to make sure that we secure and execute the rebuilding and reconstruction process effectively and properly and I don’t think we should have an artificial deadline when to do that. What’s important is that we have a long-term plan in process and short-term security strategy.
It's quite reasonable to conclude that Senator Obama would say anything to get elected, regardless of the effect that his words might have on the outcome of world-changing events--like wars. He has proved that he has no problem with contradicting himself without offering an explanation for the contradiction.
Readers should note that I said that I can't remember a more scurrilous statement by a major party candidate. Smart politicians leave the scurrilous stuff to their aides; in fact, a McCain spokesman expressed these words almost exactly on July 14. There is a reason why politicians who want to be President don't say these sort of things: It isn't presidential.So, according to Klein, it's a "meltdown" because it isn't presidential. Whether it's a reasonable conclusion, whether it's the truth, is irrelevant.
That's politics, I suppose.
Then again, Klein's overreaction probably has much simpler explanation. He is probably just angry because someone said something bad about his savior. I understand that, since I get angry when someone slanders my Savior.
But it isn't slander if it's true, now is it?